144 
85 S8 

py 1 



I A Brief Account 



of 



I Woodbury Creek Dam 

I 



t^^ 



By 

FRANK H. STEWART 
President of the Gloucester County Historical Society ' 

Woodbury, N. J. 







/^-^t->*'^ 



^/ /f/f 



Woodbury Creek Dam 



By Frank H. Stewart President of the Gloucester County 
Historical Society. 



The ancient Indian name of Woodberry 
Creek, as it is spelled in our earliest 
records, meant the place of black burrs 
(Peskozackassing). It would not re- 
quire much imagination to infer that 
Wood berries and black burrs were one 
and the same thing. It has also been 
suggested that Woodbury was named 
after Woodbury, Connecticut, but the 
commonly accepted tradition is that an 
early settler, Henry Wood, senior of 
Bury, County of Lancaster, England, 
who with his sons bought land of 
Bylling, April 3, 16S3, and who settled 
at the mouth of Woodbury Creek soon 
afterwards, is responsible for the name 
now perpetuated by the City of Wood- 
bury, and the famous creek over which 
there has been so much contention. 

Samuel Mickle. of Woodbury, who kept 
a wonderful diary of the years 1792 to 
1829, recorded on December 26. 1820, 
that he "read after candle light ye manu- 
script papers respecting ye wars about 
Woodbury Dam in 1754." Unfortu- 
nately, these manuscript papers are now 
missing, but they, without a doubt, be- 
longed to his uncle, John Ladd, Jr., 
whose papers he then had. 

In the iSeptember 1754 sealing in dock- 
ets of the Gloucester County Courts, we 
find the entry of a suit of James 
Whitall and Joseph Low, versus John 
Ladd, Fisher Hopper, Habakuk Ward, 
Joseph Jaggard, Savil Wilson, Thomas 
Clark, Corneling Clark, Stephen Clark, 
James Ward, Joseph Ward, and Moses 
Ward, Jr. Judging from the facts now 
before me, I think that this suit had 
something to do with the so-called Ward 
Dam that stopped off the waters at the 



head of Woodbury Creek, and which in- 
terferred somewhat with the plans of 
Whitall and Low, and others, to dam 
Woodbury Creek at its mouth. It was 
very unusual for one Quaker to sue an- 
other, and nothing but a defiance of the 
rules of Friends' Meeting can now be 
seen in this litigation record. 

The bitterness of the contest is re- 
flected in the words, "wars about Wood- 
bury Dam." The following pages show 
that it was not only a source of con- 
flict then, but continued so for seventy- 
five years and more. 

The dam across the mouth of Wood- 
bury Creek was built about four years 
prior to the twenty-fourth of April, 
1760, when .Ann Whitall wrote in her 
diary: "Hab. Ward and Mos. Ward 
came here to the dam there has been so 
much quarreling about, and brought two 
axes, two mattocks, and two spades to 
cut the dam down, and to work they 
went, and Sparks brought the Sheriff, 
and there was miserable work, but they 
tied them and took them to Joseph Har- 
rison, and from there to jail." (See 
Notes on Old Gloucester Co.) 

Ann Whitall, afterwards known as the 
Heroine of Red Bank, lived on the farjn 
where the battle of Red Bank was 
fought, in a red brick house still stand- 
ing a few hundred feet north of the 
bank that dammed Woodbury Creek. 
Across this dam the Whitalls drove their 
live stock the day of the battle. After 
the defeat of the Hessians, Count Donop 
was taken across the dam to Joseph 
Low's, and then died in a brick house 
long since torn down, but the old trees 
that shaded it still survive, and the prop- 



WOODBURY CREEK DAM 



erty is still owned by a descendant 
named Low. 

Benjamin "Whitall, the son of Ann. 
was a captain of artillery. Her brother, 
John Cooper, was a member of the Pro- 
vincial Congress of New Jersey, and a 
delegate to the Continental Congress. 
His term with the other New Jersey 
delegates expired a few days before the 
first of July, 1776, and their successors 
signed the Declaration of Independence 
on behalf of the people of New Jersey. 
He undoubtedly took part in the discus- 
sion on the resolution of Richard Henry 
Lee. 

Joseph Low was a member of a pat- 
riotic committee, and was disowned by 
Friends Meeting because of his activi- 
ties, the same as John Cooper. When 
I first be'.ime interested in Gloucester 
C'»unty history, I often wondered why 
the British and American troops, both 
alike, stole from and perset^uted the 
family of James and Ann Whitall. The 
P'nglish knew, of course, about John 
Cooper and Benjamin Whitall. The 
Americans knew they were Quakers, and 
opposed to force. They were truly be- 
tween the two millstones. 

The following advertisement appeared 
in Franklin's newspaper, the "Pennsyl- 
varaa Gazette," of June 29, 1758: 

Notice is hereby given. That the Pe- 
titioners of Woodbury Creek, in the 
County of Gloucester and Province of 
West New Jersey, have leave to bring in 
the Bill ihey pray for the first Monday 
of the next sitting of the House of As- 
sembly of said Province at Burlington, 
for clearing out of said creek above the 
Dam for keeping the freshets from 
overflowing the meadows above said 
Dam, and for maintaining the said 
dam and waterworks. If any persons 
have any objections to make, they are 
desired to offer them. Dated June 5, 
1758. 

April 24, 1760, an advertisement was 
printed in the same newspaper by Wil- 
liam and Ruth Wood to the effect that 
on May 7th following, a plantation of 
the late Henry Woods, situated in the 
township of Deptford, Gloucester 
County, N. J., would be offered for sale. 
The plantation was located about five 



miles from Gloucestei'. and one and one- 
half miles from Woodbury, and con- 
tained a pretty large new brick house, 
and one hundred acres of the best 
meadow grounds our country affoi'ds, be- 
ing made dry by stopping a creek where- 
on it lies. 

When the dam was first erected at the 
mouth of the f'reek, it was done without 
the consent of some of the meadow- 
holders at the very head of the creek. 
Four years after the bank was erected, 
and much exertion made to have it taken 
away by the owners at the head of the 
creek, both sides appeared before the 
Legislature. A compromise was made, 
and all of those at the head of the creek 
opposed to the dam a.sjreed to accept 
100 pounds (one hundred pounds), to be 
divided among them, and gave up their 
privileges and opposition to the dam. 

The remaining meadow-holders who 
made the dam owned the principal part 
nf the meadow on the creek, to wit: 
.Tames Whitall and Joseph Low. who 
lived dire;'tly at the mouth of the creek, 
together with two or three families of 
the Woods. The remaining owners 
agreed and purchased the right to dam 
the creek, and paid the 100 pounds. On 
the north side, the meadow was owned 
by Whitall, Wood and Andrews up to 
Habakuk Ward, who was one of the men 
who sold his right for 20 pounds. On 
the south side, the meadow was owned 
by the Lows and Woods, parties to the 
project. They made the dam and sup- 
ported it. 

THE FIRST LEGISLATION 

The first legislation we find about 
Woodbury Creek Dam was an act passed 
in the first year of the reign of King 
(ieorge III (December 5. 1760), en- 
titled "An act to continue the Dam 
across Woodbury Creek in the County 
of Gloucester." 

"Section 1. Whereas James W^hitall, 
William Wood, John Sparks and others 
■)wning and jtossessing meTdows on 
Woodbury Creek in the County of 
<Tloucester. esteeming it for their inter- 
est, did erect a dam across the said 
creek from the land of Benjamin Wait 



WOODBURY CREEK DAM 



to the land of the said James Whitall, 
whereby the navigation of the said <Teel< 
became and still remains obstructed, as 
alleged to the great damage of Moses 
Ward, Habbakuk Ward, James Ward, 
and other persons which has occasioned 
much controversy." 

This act, which was very voluminous, 
gives the idea that the dam was built 
without process of law, and that it 
worked damage to owners of meadow 
laud further up the creek where the 
Wards had erected a dam years before. 
The Legislative act specified a commit- 
tee of John Wetherill. Andrew Smyth, 
John Hart, Joseph Skeleton, Azariah 
Hunt, William Lowrie, and John Ander- 
son, of Freehold, or any four of them, to 
assess benefits and damages in case 
those interested in the contention did 
not select seven arbitrators to agree on 
a settlement. 

Section 2 of the act required the set- 
tlement or assessment to be filed in the 
office of the Clerk of the Supreme 
Court at Burlington. 

Section 6 provided that Whitall, Wood 
and Sparks should remove the dam if 
they were opposed to the award of the 
arbitrators. 

Section 9 said it was the true design 
of the act to put a final end to the many 
disputes that had and still existed. 

Section 10 gave the right for the 
owners of meadow land between Wood- 
bury Creek dam and the Wards dam to 
meet yearly the first Monday in Septem- 
ber at the dwelling house of Joseph 
Tatham, and appoint managers and an 
asse.ssor to repair, maintain and uphold 
Woodbury Creek Dam. 

This act designed to cover every lit- 
tle detail that might arise after its pas- 
sage, as usual witjj such attempts, did 
not fully answer the purpose, because a 
few years later, May 10, 1768, another 
act was passed to remedy the defects in 
the first act. The second act provided 
for a concern henceforth to be called 
the Lower Meadows Co., owning mead- 
ows and swamps below Moses Ward's 
dam on Woodbury Creek, so far as the 
tide used to flow. This Company was 
to meet yearly in March and elect two 



overseers, two managers, and a clerk, 
and an assessor to regulate the mead- 
ows for the common good of the owners. 
James Whitall and Joseph Low were ap- 
pointed first managers; James Cooper 
and John Wood overseers; John Es- 
taugh Hopkins assessor, and James 
Whitall, Clerk, who was to provide him- 
self with a book wherein entries should 
be made and minutes kept of all meet- 
ings of the Company. Mr. John G. 
Whitall told me that he at one time had 
these books. It is hoped they will be 
found and deposited with the Gloucester 
County Historical Society. The second 
act repealed the first one, and gave per- 
mission to erect flood gates at or near 
Ward's dam, and in Tredway's branch at 
or where the public road from Woodbury 
to the Delaware River crossed it. The 
flood gates were to be so made as to 
prevent the tide waters from flowing up 
the creek and branch, but not so as to 
prevent a free passage for the back- 
water through them. It is the idea of 
John G. Whitall that the flood gates 
here and at the mouth of Woodbury 
Creek swung on hinges, or their equiv- 
alent. 

The Meadows above Ward's dam were 
evidently known as the Upper Meadow 
Co., and it is probable they obtained a 
right to dam the creek before the year 
1760, because their rights were specifi- 
cally protected as follows: "Provided 
always that nothing herein contained 
shall divest the owners and possessors 
of the meadows on the head of said creek 
of any power or authority they had or 
enjoyed befoi'e the passing of this 
act," etc. 

Samuel Mickle wrote in his diary un- 
der date of August 6, 1813, that he "on 
invitation of James Saunders, went ye 
P. M. with him and his son, Isaac, fish- 
ing at Woodbury Dam. I caught but 
three small oldwives." 

TIDE WATER LEVELS 

On January 26, 1828, Amos Campbell, 
James Sterling, Joseph Scott and 
Ephraim Miller certified that in the 
month of February, 1824, the tide water 



WOODBURY CREEK DAM 



from the river Delaware was let iuto 
AVoodbury Creek in consequence of a 
breach or breaches in the river bank — 
that at high tide, the water rose at the 
town of Woodbury so as to overflow the 
top of the arch of the old stone bridge 
across said creek a few rods below the 
main road or street. That so long as the 
tide continued to ebb and flow in the 
said creek, the arch as aforesaid was 
overflowed at high tide, and that being 
citizens of Woodbury, residing near the 
creek, they had daily observation of the 
fact. 

On the same day. two of them, viz.: 
Amos Campbell and James Sterling, 
both architects of Woodbury, certified 
that they had measured the height of 
the arch of the old stone bridge across 
Woodbury Creek a few rods below the 
then, main road, and that from the sur- 
face of the water, as it then was, to the 
top of the arch, the height was three 
feet eleven inches, and that the present 
depth of water at the said bridge was 
three feet, so that whenever the water 
was high enough to overflow the said 
arch, the depth of the water in the creek 
would be six feet eleven inches. 

While the contest was on concerning 
the Woodbury Creek dam, it is of in- 
terest to mention that a scheme was on 
foot to dam the Delaware River above 
Trenton, which was objected to by the 
shad fishermen. 

February 4, 1828. William Strickland, 
of Philadelphia, wrote the following let- 
ter to Messrs. James Matlock, Glover 
Smallwood, Foster and Armstrong, 
Committee on the Navigation of Wood- 
bury Creek: 

"At your request, I have examined 
the ground along the margin of Wood- 
bury Creek from the Dam at its mouth, 
u|) to the stone bridge at the town of 
"\A'oodbury. 

I find from a course of levels taken, a 
copy of which accompanies this report, 
that by raising an embankment on each 
side of the creek, the average height of 
which may not be more than 4 feet 9 
inches above the surface of the mead- 
ows, the high water of the river Dela- 
ware may be made to flow at the town 
of Woodbury to the depth of 5Vo feet. 



and that it will be quite easy and practi- 
cable by clearing out the bed of the 
creek to produce a good navigation to 
the town for sloops and small craft of 
every description." 

The act to restore navigation of Wood- 
bury Creek under that title was passed 
by the Legislature at Trenton, February 
12, 1829. On May 1.3th, of that year, 
and for one year afterward, and possi- 
bly longer. James Matlock, Jacob 
Glover and Ephraim Miller, Commission- 
ers, ran an advertisement in the "Vil- 
lage Herald." a weekly newspaper of 
Woodbury, to the effect that in accord- 
ance with the legislative act to restore 
navigation from Woodbury to the Dela- 
ware River, that at 10 o'clock A. M. on 
April 1, 1831, they would proceed to 
cut, remove and clear away the dam at 
or near the mouth of said creek, and 
let in the tide to make it navigable. 

The dam was cut, and it was not long 
before there was a clamor to have the 
dam replaced, which, if anything, was 
more vociferous than that to have it de- 
stroyed. 

EFFORTS TO REiPLAOE THE DA.AI 

A short time ago. Miss Elizabeth Mat- 
lack presented me with some legal pa- 
pers that belonged to her grandfather. 
James Matlock, that shed some light on 
what actually happened after the dam 
was cut. and the meadows covered with 
tide water as they are to-day. 

Accompanying the papers is a map 
showing every house near Woodbury 
Creek, west of Broad street On the 
north side, in the vicinity of the present 
home of Dr. Underwood, was M'Callas: 
then going toward the river were Wm. R. 
Tatum's, Andrews', and Wilkins'. On 
the dam road north side of the creek, 
opposite the tavern and ferry, was a 
building unnamed. 

On the south side of the creek, going 
to the river, are marked the Court 
House, George Mickle's* William 
Cooper's, Joseph Stokes'. Thomas 
Clark's; across the road from it was 
James Mickle's, and below him at the 
corner formed by the intersection of the 



WOODBURY CREEK DAM 



Woodbury Dam and the Pivot Bridge, 
or Crown Point Road, was a house 
marlied Osborne's; across the road 
towards the creek was Amos Campbell's; 
below it a house lately owned by Jere- 
miah Wood; further down Low's house. 
On the road leading from the north side 
of the dam are the houses marked Tacy 
AVhitall, Charles Whitall, James Jessu;;. 
and Snowden around the hook in the 
Red Bank road, and west of the Crown 
Point road was the house of Ann Roe. 
directly north of the Wilkins' house 
The various owners of the meadow lands 
are enumerated, but would now add 
nothing of interest. The ferry house 
located on the river side of the dam and 
south side of the creek, and the un- 
named building opposite have long since 
disappeared. Probably some reader of 
this article may be able to tell us how 
long ago. 

On the map ot tne creeK, forty-five 
chains from the west side of the road, 
about in front of the contemplated post- 
office building, another "Old Dam" is 
marked, but no reference is made to it 
in the papers — probably Ward's Dam. 
A proposed dam is marked on the map 
about four or five chains up the creek 
to the eastward of the Camden-Crown 
Point Road, or what is now known as 
Paulsboro Road. The proposed dam 
was about one half way in a straight line 
between the former dam at the mouth 
of the creek and the present Broad 
street. 

PETITION TO LEGISLATURE 

To the Honorable, the Legislative 
Council and General Assembly of the 
State of New Jersey. 

The Subscribers, residents of the 
County of Gloucester, and State afore- 
said, respectfully showeth: 

That some of your petitioners with 
others for the purpose of improving the 
meadows on Woodbury Creek, and to re- 
store the navigation thereof, applied to 
the Legislature of the State aforesaid in 
the year 1829 for a law appointing com- 
missioners to remove the. Dam and 
Water-works at the mouth of said creek; 
that in pursuance of the law then passed, 
the said Dam and Water-works were re- 



moved in the month of May, 1831. But 
most unfortunately for your petitioners, 
and the surrounding neighborhood, five 
hundred acres of good meadow ground 
be;ame inundated with water, and ren- 
dered entirely useless to the owners, and 
as many as four hundred acres more 
lessened in value about one half. Nearly 
three years have elapsed since the re- 
moving of the said Dam, and the con- 
tinual overflow of the tide over the 
meadows. 

Your petitioners are well nssured that 
the greater part of the meadows bound- 
ing upon said creek are forever lost to 
the owners unless a dam and water- 
works be again established by law. at or 
near the place where the old law placed 
them. 

Your petitioners are further convinced 
that in consequence of the current of 
water having left the chpnuel of the 
creek, and spread itself over the surface 
of the meadow, the creek will continue 
to fill up and the navigation become use- 
less. 

Your petitioners would further beg 
leave to state that the aforesaid creek 
having remained banked off for more 
than seventy years had become filled 
with mud. and the meadow settled so low 
that it is impossible to restore them to 
their former value without resorting to 
the mode adopted by our forefathers 

Your petitioners therefore sin^-erely 
pray that your Honorable Bodies will be 
pleased to pass a law authorizing them 
to erect a Dam and water-works at ^r 
near the mouth of the creek aforesaid, 
and your petitioners will ever pray. 

Dated at Deptford Township, Novem- 
ber 20. 1883. 

Joseph Stokes I'aul Bowers 

Benj. C. Tatem Wim. D. Richards 

Samuel R. Sauulera Joel D. Lawrance 
^nccheiis T)niic,in Peter Snyder 

Thomas Schnmo Michael Aires 

Benjamin Wilkins .Tosliua Mullen 
Joseph Doron Daniel Lamb 

Joseph riilkes James W. Lamib 

Joseph Shuster John W. Lanub 

Charles Kniarht David Rose, .Tr. 

I. Cheeseiran, .Jr. James Mntlnck 
Jiiseph Curts Aaron M. Wilkins 

Sam Webster Jol) W. Wilkins 

Henry ()s'>orn Aaron Paul 

Thomas Willson William Cooier 

Benjamin Cloud Thos. Clark 

Charles Roe .Tames J. Lord 

Jos. Lodge, Jr. Thomas Glover 

Joseph D. Pedrlck Geo. M. Paul 
David B. Leslie George Ward 

David Carney Nathan Cozens. Jr. 



WOODBURY CREEK DAM 



M.ihlon Skill 
Win. Carsoii 
IsiiMc Clieesemnn 
Isaac Doughteii 
Sam'l B. Liiiiiiiu-ott 
Wii-. S. Dou^hteu 
Josiah Stokes 
Tlios. Kuisht 
Will. E. Kay 
Henry lU'adsliaw 
Beiij. B. Sinister 
Clias. F. Wilkius 
Levin Deiiiten 
Sam'l Kenible 
S. Sailor 
Win. Porch 
John Estell 
John Godfrey 
Chas. French, Jr. 
William Haines 
Arttur Brjwn 
Williani C. Sparks 
Joseph Willsou 
Henry Jackson 
James Cooper 
William E. Cooper 
Ptichard >I. Cooper 
Charles Kaighn 
Bbenezer Toole 
Wim. R. Kai.ijhn 
(ieorge P. Bender 
John Thorne 
Benjamin Allen 
Ephraim Bee 
Nathaniel Chew 
Joseph Shernir 
Joseph Johnson 
Joel Wood 
James Graham 
Marmaduke Beckley 
Jos. T. TaLereeu 
Jonathan Packer 
Thomas S. Dyos 
Jesse C. Cox 
Levi C Campbell 
Cornelius Boys 
Handel iNicholson 
Sam'l W. Estlock 
Joseph W. Paul 
Thomas Thomson 
Champneys Ranibo 
Dan'l €. .Cozens 
Isaac Thomson, Jr. 
Eli Thomson 
George Bowers 
Wni. Feni.more 
Elias England 
Asher Borden 
Jeremiah Adams 
Jonathan Heritage 
Kichard Moffett, Jr. 
Joseph Henry 
James Jaggard 
Peter S. Kerns 
Malachi H. Lodge 
C. V. Clark 
William Mickle 
Thomas Ford 
Isaac H. Wood 
Jeh. Wood 
John S Lord 
Isaac Derickson 
Charles Lock 
Elijah Bowen 



Philip E. M - 
Richard Scull 
Jose oh J. West 
Peter Huews 
Joel Parker 
tlarrot Clark 
David Wood 
James Jessup, Jr, 
Wni. Madora 
Isaac Wanier 
John Hews 
David Whitall 
Mark Clements 
Peter Sigars 
Joshua Lord 
Theophilus Hillman 
John Kerns 
Bowman Sailer 
Charles Brown 
Sam'l R. Chardon 
William Murphy 
John R. Tonkin 
Win. Thorne 
John B. Hilyard 
Charles Hoipkins 
John Brown 
Joseph Kaighn 
I. C. Dilkes 
Jones Keen 
Benj. WhitaU 
Samuel Kirby 
John L. Cooper 
Amos Clark 
Charles Reeves 
Edimund Weatterby 
.John B. Jessup 
Charles Fisher 
Benjamin I'erkins 
Joshiah R. Andrews 
Stille Chew 
Thomas Russell 
Reuibin Haines 
Johu W. Cloud 
Charles R. Cloud 
Robert Howey 
Joseph Skill 
James Saunders, Jr. 
Benj. W. Mickle 
T. C. Humphreys 
Richard Clark 
Joshua E. Webster 
W. C. Fifer 
George Loudenslager 
Sam K. Chardon 
John Lord 
Benh. D. Andrews 
Benjamin Lord 
.Tames H. Lord 
Isaac Lord 
Wesley Miller 
Joseph J. Currie 
John M. Richards 
William Caffrey 
Joshua Cozens 
Wiu. Stevenson 
Geo. T. Atkinson 
Nathan Folwell 
Thomas Iredell 
Jonathan Colson 
Samuel Weatherby 
Samuel Gaunt 
Amasa Garwood 
P. Ferriman Leddon 
Jesse Rice 



D. C. Ogden 
Abel Peterson 
Jacob Howey 
S iniuel Ogden 
Samuel C. Allen 
John B. Siiode 
Jos. Fullerton, Jr. 
Felix Smith 
Enoch Allen 
Joshua Eiigle 
Joshiah Lipriincott 
Jr. Jose;. h Chatha.m 
Israel Pancoast 
John Atkinson 
Samuel Atkinson 



Enoch Aggings 
.\bel Knight 
M;irtiii W. Rulon 
Charles Starr 
John Peters 
James Hornor 
John S. Leonard 
Jacoli Seeds 
Jacob Sigars 
Jos. C. Pancoast 
John Shivers 
Jonathan Colson, 
Thomas Hardikiu 
Benjamin Colson 
t'Lalkley Moore 
Charles Wilkins 

Ai^parently notliing resulted from the 
attempt to again dam Woodbury Creek 
at its mouth. I consider it quite prob- 
able tliat the petition was presented to 
the T.egislature. but it is evident that ob- 
.iection was made, because the following 
year another i etition was circulated and 
generously signed, asking for a dara 
about half wav up the creek between 
the river and Woodbury. The map de- 
scribed probably accompanied this peti- 
tion. 

ANOTHER PETITION 

To the Honorable, the F-egislative Coun- 
cil and General Assembly of the State 
of New Jersey. The I'etitioners of 
the Inhabitants of the County of 
Gloucester respectfully shovveth: 
That near four years hath elapsed 
since the dam and water works at the 
mouth of Woodbury Creek was removed 
for the restoring the navigation of the 
said creek, and for the improvement of 
the meadow thereon, but in consequence 
of such removal five hundred acres of 
meadow are de.stroyed. and the naviga- 
tion of the upper part of the creek of 
but little advantage compared with the 
entire loss of the meadow. 

Your Petitioners therefor pray a law 
may be passed authorizing commissioners 
to erect a dam and water works on said 
creek where the Crown Point Road 
crosses the same. Your Petitioners will 
ever pray. 

12th. 12mo., 1834. 
David B. Cooper David Cooper 

Paul Cooper Samuel Kemble 

James Matlack Joseph Ogden 

Josiah R. Andrews Joseph D. Pedrlck 
Isaac Cheesman, Jr. Geo. M. Paul 
John B. Jessuip Nathan Cozens, Jr, 

Charles Stokes Jesse Smith 

Sam'l Webster Nicholas Pidgeon 

Thos. Clark Thomas (ilovei 

Samuel Ogden John Redtield 



WOODBURY CREEK DAM 



7 



William Scott 
James Jessup, Jr. 
Thomas Russell 
Geo rife Allen 
Elijah Chew 
John (J. Shivers 
Benjamin Madara 
Thomas Keou^h 
Michael Morgan 
Benj. Wilkins 
Thomas Ford 
Isaac Hi'nchiman 
W. E. Cooper 
Gabriel Davis 
Josejih Stokes 
James Mickle 
Win. Cooper 
Benh. D. Andrews 
James Dilks 
James H. Lord 
Amos Campbell 
Jno. R. Sickler 
C. V. Clark 
John Mickle 
Thos. Schnmo 
Joseph Biddle 
David Whitall 
Thomas Medara 
Aaron M. Wilkins 
Firman Layman 
William Heppard, Jr. 
James Hinchman 
B. P. Lippincott 
Benjamin Perkins 
7ebulon Pierson 
Richard Fetters 
Charles Reeves 
Philip Emmel 
Richard Scull 
Arthur Brown 
William Haines 
Abraham Linpincott 
Bowman Sailer 
Francis Carson 
Thos. L. Sharp 
Abel Knisrtt 
Jacob Wilkins 
Joshua E. Campbell 
John B. Hilyard 
Joseiih M. Cooper 
Chas. F. Wilkins 
Sam M. Stephens 
Robert Cooper 
John Bud 
Peter Curts 



Charles Whitall 
William R. Tatum 
James Roe 
Josiah Linipincott 
Felix Smith 
William Elkins 
Reuben M. Stiles 
James Giibson 
Joseiih Ashbrook 
David Jaggard 
Henry Rulon 
Sam'l C. Allen 
Joseph A. Chatham 
Josept Chatham 
Sam'l A. Coles 
Enoch Aggiugs 
Richard Matlack 
Joseph Doron 
.Tosei)h C. Pancoast 
Jesse Rice 
Stacy French 
George Ward 
Charles Brown 
Ameriah Pierce 
Thomas Doron 
Amaza Garwood 
Martin W. Rulon 
Sam'l H. Weatherby 
William Ward 
Thomas Sailer 
.Pennimeno Leddre 
Jacob G. Tiirner 
Nathan T. Stratton 
William Holmes 
Edward Wallace 
Charles Wilkins 
.John Moone 
Joel Packer 
Jonathan Colson 
Robert Davis 
Peter Stetser 
Henrv Burt 
Job W. Wilkins 
Charles Stetser 
Josept L. Ste"hens 
Tobias Casperson 
Sam'l Whovo 
Isaac Hews 
Henry Osborn 
Henry Osborn. Jr. 
William Wilkins 
Aron Wallace 
Richard Parker 
.Tose'ih Willson 
James Cox 



On November 25, 1834, according to 
George E. Pierson. an advertisement was 
placed in the "Woodbury Constitution" 
signed by George Mickle, Charles Knight. 
James Mickle, Josiah R. Andrews, James 
Matlack, Thomas Clark, William Cooper, 
•Joseph Stokes and Isaac Cheeseman to 
the effect that a petition would be made 
to the Legislature on January 14. 1835. 
for a law appointing commissioners to 
erect a dam and water works on Wood- 
bury Creek between the pivot bridge on 
the Crown Point Road, and the mouth 



of Matthews' branch. The proposed lo- 
cation corresponds with the sp.K on the 
map referred to before, but the l.i'gisla- 
ture did not look on the proposition with 
favor, and no action was t^ken. A few 
years ago Woodbury Creek was deep- 
ened and straightened, and its waters 
ebb and flow twice in eve.-y twenty-four 
hours as they did when Hog IsUud. on 
the opposite side of the Debiwa; e. was 
called Quistconck. 

Accompanying the petition is a state- 
ment to the New Jersey Legislature 
signed by the owners of the meadows 
lying on Woodbury Creek who were citi- 
zens of Gloucester County. They were 
Wm. Cooper. James Matlack, Charles 
Knight, Thomas Clark, Joseph Stokes, 
James Mickle. Aaron M. Wilkins, Zac- 
cheus Duncan. Benjamin Cloud. Josiah 
R. Andrews, Charles Whitall. Henry Os- 
born. Isaac Cheesman. Jr., Joseph Shus- 
ter. .James Jessup, and Benjamin Lord. 
The statement itemized the different es- 
timated losses such as crops, taxes, em- 
bankment expenses, causeway losses that 
amounted to four thousand dollars an- 
nually. 

Another list gives the names of thirty- 
one owners of meadow land on Woodbury 
Creek, and its bran 'hes, aggregating 
four hundred and fourteen and one-half 
acres overflowed by the tide. 

iFrom a memorandum, we find that 

Samuel Webster was County Col- 
lector. 

John Mickle. boat builder. 

Thomas Schumo, watchmaker. 

•John R Sickler, physician 

Joseph D. Pedrick, wheelwright and 
farmer. 

Geo. M. Paul, storekeeper and farmer. 

Jesse Smith, mechanic and weaver. 

Nathan Cozens, tailor. 

Nicholas Pidgeon, shoemaker. 

Thomas Glover, blacksmith. 

Thomas Madara, carpenter and far- 
mer. 

James Roe. storekeeper. 

Sam'l Kemble. constable. 

Ephraim Miller. Justice of the Peace. 

Jesse Smith, innkeeper and fa>-mer. 

Joseph Fithian, physician. 



W^OODBURY CREEK DAM 



Daniel J. il'acker, blat-ksmith and far- 
mer. 

John C. Smalhvood. County Clerk. 

There were aiJpnrcMitly two .lesse 
Smith's living in Woodburv in 18.34. 

From a recapitulation of the build- 
ings in Woodbury in 1S34. we find there 
were one hundred and three dwelliiis^- 
thirteen stores and twenty-three offices; 
printing and work shops, all figured as 
separate buildings, but probably in most 
cases on the same lots as the dwellings. 
The owners of fifty-four of the buildings 
favored the "stopi)ing" of the creek. 
The owners of thirty-two buildings were 
opposed. The owners of twenty-two 
buildings were neutral or indifferent. 
Thirty-one buildings were owned by 
widows and non-residents. Those op- 
posed to the dam were: Ephraim Miller, 
Daniel J. Packer, Jesse Smith. Josiah 
iS. Franklin, John Simmerman. Simon 
Sparks, Samuel- Cole, Joseph Saunders, 
Jacob Glover, John Hannah, Joseph 
Fithian and Joseph Franklin. Those 
who were indifferent were Joseph 
Curtts, Michael C. Fisher. Samuel Ladd, 
John 'Moore White, Andrew Eacritt, 
William Fletcher, Samuel Kemble, Sam- 
uel Hudson, Martha Saunders, Clement 
Daniels, Aaron Cade, and John Fletcher. 

From the list of property owners, we 
learn that James Matlack owned more 
property than any other person in Wood- 
bury ,namely six houses, one store, and 
one shop. Nancy Roe owned four 
houses, and one store. Joseph Fithian 
four houses and one shop. Jacob Glover. 
Thomas Madara, and a person named 
Dickerson owned three buildings each, 
and Samuel Webster owned a school 
nouse. 

In an article read before the Glouces- 
ter County Historical Society at Red 
Bank by John G. Whitall, he said that 
in 1S2'9 the Legislature passed an act 
for the removal of the dam, giving the 



property owners along the creek two 
years to erect banks to prevent the tide 
from overflowing their meadows. The 
dam was removed in 1S;^1, causing great 
bitterness on the part of the farmers 
injured, who for years afterwards re- 
fused' to trade with Woodbury stores. 
His own father. Charles G. Whitall, dis- 
continued the professional services of 
Dr. Fithian, of Woodbury. One of the 
reasons put forth for the destructi m of 
the dam was that it caused malarial 
chills and fevers. 

In the winter of 1849-.'")fl. a high storm 
tide washed away so much <>f the lower 
side of the dam bank that the road lead- 
ing to Leven Densten's, who kept the tav- 
ern, became imi)assable. He put in a claim 
for damages because the dam road was 
not kept up, which was allowed by the 
township, and the rcrad vacated. The 
tavern, being below high water mark, 
was flooded, and soon ruined. 

Woodbury dam in its |)rime was a ship- 
ping point for Woodbury twice a week; 
on Tuesdays and Fridays, packets sailed 
to Philadelphia. Mr. Whitall remembers 
an old woman, Mercy Fowler, who grew 
acres of lavender which she* sold in 
Philadelphia, also other things, on com- 
mission for her Thorofare neighbors. 
John G. Whitall says that Thorofare and 
vicinity was formerly known as Flyatem 
town. 

January 26. 1828. Samuel Mickle 
wrote in his diary: "Cousin Josiah 
Tatum ye P. M. came with a petition or 
remonstrance against opening ye naviga- 
tion of Woodbury Creek. Also John 
Reeve a few days ago presented to me a 
memorial and petition for opening said 
navigation, but I signed neither of them. 
N. B.' — In or about ye year 1754, a dam 
was erected and navigation stopped about 
which this neighborhood was in a great 
ferment on the said occasion." 



LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 



014 207 905 7 



